IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v99y2019icp145-156.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What can we learn from business models in the European forest sector: Exploring the key elements of new business model designs

Author

Listed:
  • Kajanus, Miika
  • Leban, Vasja
  • Glavonjić, Predrag
  • Krč, Janez
  • Nedeljković, Jelena
  • Nonić, Dragan
  • Nybakk, Erlend
  • Posavec, Stjepan
  • Riedl, Marcel
  • Teder, Meelis
  • Wilhelmsson, Erik
  • Zālīte, Zinta
  • Eskelinen, Tuomo

Abstract

This study represents the first attempt to operationalize a novel methodological approach that couples the expanded business model canvas (BMC) with an analytical evaluation of business model items and incorporates context-intervention-mechanism-outcome logic (CIMO-logic). We applied the designed methodology to analyse ten forest-related business models in eight European countries. This study aims to enhance the understanding of the challenges and opportunities generated by changing forest ownership due to the use of new business models. The adopted procedures both enhance the understanding of existing business models and the associated mechanisms and suggest improvements for existing business models. In other words, these procedures facilitated the understanding of business model dynamics. The changing operational environment forces the traditional forestry industry to adapt, and the analysed European cases indicate that business system innovations should always be considered to meet consumers' needs. The analysed business models are mostly grounded on traditional forestry and mainly include either new services or organizational improvements. The analysed business models introduce new organizational channels for reaching customers, satisfying new customer needs, targeting unique customers, reducing transaction costs, and improving customer relationships.

Suggested Citation

  • Kajanus, Miika & Leban, Vasja & Glavonjić, Predrag & Krč, Janez & Nedeljković, Jelena & Nonić, Dragan & Nybakk, Erlend & Posavec, Stjepan & Riedl, Marcel & Teder, Meelis & Wilhelmsson, Erik & Zālīte, , 2019. "What can we learn from business models in the European forest sector: Exploring the key elements of new business model designs," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 145-156.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:99:y:2019:i:c:p:145-156
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2018.04.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934117301697
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.04.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kissling-Naf, Ingrid & Bisang, Kurt, 2001. "Rethinking recent changes of forest regimes in Europe through property-rights theory and policy analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3-4), pages 99-111, November.
    2. Liesio, Juuso & Mild, Pekka & Salo, Ahti, 2007. "Preference programming for robust portfolio modeling and project selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1488-1505, September.
    3. Ann Markusen, 2003. "Fuzzy Concepts, Scanty Evidence, Policy Distance: The Case for Rigour and Policy Relevance in Critical Regional Studies," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(6-7), pages 701-717.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vito Imbrenda & Rosa Coluzzi & Francesca Mariani & Bogdana Nosova & Eva Cudlinova & Rosanna Salvia & Giovanni Quaranta & Luca Salvati & Maria Lanfredi, 2023. "Working in (Slow) Progress: Socio-Environmental and Economic Dynamics in the Forestry Sector and the Contribution to Sustainable Development in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-21, June.
    2. Tuomo Eskelinen & Oswald Sydd & Miika Kajanus & David Fernández Gutiérrez & Miguel Mitsou & José M. Soriano Disla & Manuel Vals Sevilla & Johan Ib Hansen, 2022. "Fortifying Social Acceptance When Designing Circular Economy Business Models on Biowaste Related Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-24, November.
    3. Maria Lanfredi & Rosa Coluzzi & Vito Imbrenda & Bogdana Nosova & Massimiliano Giacalone & Rosario Turco & Marcela Prokopovà & Luca Salvati, 2023. "In-between Environmental Sustainability and Economic Viability: An Analysis of the State, Regulations, and Future of Italian Forestry Sector," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-21, May.
    4. Kendisha Soekardjo Hintz & Jürgen Pretzsch, 2023. "Co‐creation of business models for smallholder forest farmers’ organizations: Lessons learned from rural Ethiopia and Tanzania," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(3), pages 921-949, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vilkkumaa, Eeva & Liesiö, Juuso & Salo, Ahti, 2014. "Optimal strategies for selecting project portfolios using uncertain value estimates," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(3), pages 772-783.
    2. Panos Xidonas & Haris Doukas & George Mavrotas & Olena Pechak, 2016. "Environmental corporate responsibility for investments evaluation: an alternative multi-objective programming model," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 247(2), pages 395-413, December.
    3. Baker, Erin & Bosetti, Valentina & Salo, Ahti, 2016. "Finding Common Ground when Experts Disagree: Belief Dominance over Portfolios of Alternatives," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 243147, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    4. Simone Carmine & Valentina De Marchi, 2023. "Reviewing Paradox Theory in Corporate Sustainability Toward a Systems Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 139-158, April.
    5. Doloreux, David & Parto, Saeed, 2005. "Regional innovation systems: Current discourse and unresolved issues," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 133-153.
    6. Ron Boschma & Ron Martin, 2010. "The Aims and Scope of Evolutionary Economic Geography," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    8. Robert Hassink & Dong-Ho Shin, 2005. "Guest Editorial," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(4), pages 571-580, April.
    9. Gary A S Cook & Naresh R Pandit & Jonathan V Beaverstock & Peter J Taylor & Kathy Pain, 2007. "The Role of Location in Knowledge Creation and Diffusion: Evidence of Centripetal and Centrifugal Forces in the City of London Financial Services Agglomeration," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 39(6), pages 1325-1345, June.
    10. Al James, 2005. "Demystifying the role of culture in innovative regional economies," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(9), pages 1197-1216.
    11. Ann Markusen & Gregory H. Wassall & Douglas DeNatale & Randy Cohen, 2008. "Defining the Creative Economy: Industry and Occupational Approaches," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 22(1), pages 24-45, February.
    12. James Rees & Alex Lord, 2013. "Making space: Putting politics back where it belongs in the construction of city regions in the North of England," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 28(7-8), pages 679-695, November.
    13. Yael Grushka-Cockayne & Bert De Reyck & Zeger Degraeve, 2008. "An Integrated Decision-Making Approach for Improving European Air Traffic Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(8), pages 1395-1409, August.
    14. Keshab Das, 2015. "Situating Labour in the Global Production Network Debate: As if the ‘South’ Mattered," Working Papers id:6665, eSocialSciences.
    15. Eduardo Fernández & Claudia Gómez-Santillán & Nelson Rangel-Valdez & Laura Cruz-Reyes, 2022. "Group Multi-Objective Optimization Under Imprecision and Uncertainty Using a Novel Interval Outranking Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 945-994, October.
    16. Morton, Alec, 2014. "Aversion to health inequalities in healthcare prioritisation: A multicriteria optimisation perspective," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 164-173.
    17. Eran Razin, 2015. "District plans in Israel: post-mortem?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(5), pages 1246-1264, October.
    18. Juho Kokkala & Kimmo Berg & Kai Virtanen & Jirka Poropudas, 2019. "Rationalizable strategies in games with incomplete preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(2), pages 185-204, March.
    19. Heike Mayer, 2013. "Spinoff regions: entrepreneurial emergence and regional development in second-tier high-technology regions – observations from the Oregon and Idaho electronics sectors," Chapters, in: Frank Giarratani & Geoffrey J.D. Hewings & Philip McCann (ed.), Handbook of Industry Studies and Economic Geography, chapter 8, pages 207-229, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Zafer Sonmez, 2017. "Inventor mobility and the geography of knowledge flows: evidence from the US biopharmaceutical industry," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(5), pages 670-682.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:99:y:2019:i:c:p:145-156. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.